Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from sjddaj. Show sjddaj's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    I agree with the top 3.  Although I found it kind of odd, that when talking about Feliz as a starter for Texas, Nick described him as being "filthy".  Yet Bard is listed as a question mark.  Bard can be just as "filthy" and Feliz can be just as much of a question mark going from the pen into the rotation.

    I would be inclined to put the Sox (or maybe Philly) at #4 though then the other at #5.

    Not really impressed with the Cardinals being that high.  They are solid in the OF, but outside of 1b, their infield is pretty bad.  Other than Carpenter, their rotation is nothing to talk about either.  "IF" Wainwright comes back strong would be a big boost for the starters.   But, I just don't see them being rated this high.

    Same with Detroit (in reverse order).  Their infield is good, obviously Fielder and Cabrera is a monster combo, but their entire OF is questionable at best.   Outside of Verlander, there isn't a single starter they have that I would want on the Sox.
    So, they are top heavy with a few big bombs (Fielder, Cabrera, Verlander, Peralta for a SS and Avila for a C) but after that?

    So, I would put the Sox at #4/5 with Philly.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    There were several teams put above the Red Sox that made me think that Nick is discounting the local team due to familiarity.  The Phillies, Detroit and Cardinals all have not impressed me with their off-season, which is what the grading is for.  The Phillies may have just brought in the least cost-effective FA contract of the winter, and brought a fil-in bat.  Given the year Madson had last year, and the injury bug they are dealing with, this team should be treading water or stepping back a bit.  But I have to agree that the Mets were just about the worst team in baseball this off-season.  What a sham, for a big market team.  They need new ownership and new FO top to bottom, IMO.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    Mostly disagree.  I don't see the Angels going from a legit 86-win team to being the best team in BB.  The Cards were lucky to make the playoffs last year, and lost Pujols.  The Tigers played over their heads last year, and Fielder only replaces VMart, not adds to him.

    On a more linear basis, I think the NYY are much better than LAA and Philly much better than StL and he has them reversed.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dicorpo. Show dicorpo's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    I think the rating was accurate, because the Sox are really one move away from everyone being satisfied and I think everything we are reading is gamesmanship by Ben and the FO. Should they trade for Gavin Floyd or sign Jackson, then everyone will be able to step away from the cliff. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    Bard is avery big question mark, no one knows if his success as a reliever is going to translate to success as a starter. i remember he struggled as a starter his first couple of seasons in the Red Sox farm system. I like Aceves but again no guarantees there either. I feell they have to pick up at least one "quality starter" and I mean quality, not the question marks that they have picked up recently.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?:
    [QUOTE]I agree with the top 3.  Although I found it kind of odd, that when talking about Feliz as a starter for Texas, Nick described him as being "filthy".  Yet Bard is listed as a question mark.  Bard can be just as "filthy" and Feliz can be just as much of a question mark going from the pen into the rotation. I would be inclined to put the Sox (or maybe Philly) at #4 though then the other at #5. Not really impressed with the Cardinals being that high.  They are solid in the OF, but outside of 1b, their infield is pretty bad.  Other than Carpenter, their rotation is nothing to talk about either.  "IF" Wainwright comes back strong would be a big boost for the starters.   But, I just don't see them being rated this high. Same with Detroit (in reverse order).  Their infield is good, obviously Fielder and Cabrera is a monster combo, but their entire OF is questionable at best.   Outside of Verlander, there isn't a single starter they have that I would want on the Sox. So, they are top heavy with a few big bombs (Fielder, Cabrera, Verlander, Peralta for a SS and Avila for a C) but after that? So, I would put the Sox at #4/5 with Philly.
    Posted by sjddaj[/QUOTE]


    Well. I see where the Sox fans on this board get their "grass is greener" mentality.

     
    I should have looked into sports journalism as a career.  Don't need objectivity, no point in checking facts.  The most important attribute is you need the ability to scare up large amounts of controversy where there is none and large amounts of panic when there is the slightest level of uncertainty...
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    after NYY & Texas, I think we are right there....but there a lot of question marks no doubt
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    Wow we lost Paps,Scrubtaro and Theo and all of a sudden this team is rated number 7???? Paps was a big loss because he could handle the bright lights,but whose to say Bailey or Melancon can't? Sorry to all Scutaro fans but he was only mediocre and in a game where defense can make a difference at 3 positions SS,CF and catcher, he was not regardless of the skewed numbers, a top SS defensively. As for Theo it's a classic case of addition by subtraction!!! He was spending money like a a well kept lady of the evening,and only getting pennies on the dollar for his big spending ways as far as production is concerned. I also read that Cafardo believes that Selig is going to make a statement when issuing the compensation to the Sox, it is Nick's belief that Selig is not happy with the cooperate raiding tactic used by the Cubbies,we will see how that plays out..Depending on how all the Chips fall the Sox could be even better than last year with a much better result in September. I would say number 4 would be their proper ranking just because of the departures of Theo and Tippy.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from caseycsw. Show caseycsw's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

         I agree with sjddaj, joebreidey and parhunter1 that the Cards are overrated by Cafardo.  Also, I think what sjddaj and joebreidey said about the Bengals being placed so high is also spot on. While I agree with Cafardo, that the Rays are not as strong as some might suggest,  I am perplexed by his claim that the loss of Damon will somehow hurt their team chemistry. Putting them at 10 with the likely best starting rotation in baseball makes Cafardo sound like an NFL analyst slumming in the MLB blogosphere....
         If I were a Red Sox fan, I am not sure that acquiring walk-prone Edwin Jackson, innings eater or not, would push me away from the cliff.  You might get away with putting a few people on base in the NL, but in the AL, one swat (especially in Fenway) and you are suddenly down 3-0.  A healthy Oswalt, or a Gavin Floyd-type, would be far more likely to make me feel confident going into the 2012 season.       Also, as I said on the day of the trade, I think the loss of Scutaro will likely hurt, unless Aviles proves to be more adept defensively (even if Scutaro was below-average defensively) than his limited numbers at short in the past suggest.  All that being said, I think the Red Sox are not as defective as a team as many of the cliff-jumpers intimate.  If they acquire Floyd or another decent alternative at the bottom of the rotation, they will be fine.  They will be strong favorites for a wild-card, especially if the wild-card is expanded as Selig has indicated.  And the way a baseball season unfolds with predictable unpredictability, and a way of disproving coventional expectations, the Valensox might play considerably above expectations.
         
         Here are my power rankings (#1 thru 10) for January 2012:

    1. Rangers
    2. Yankees
    3. Angels
    4. Rays
    5. Tigers
    6. Red Sox
    7. Phillies
    8. Marlins
    9. Cards
    10. Reds

    You can take these picks to the bank, of course.  Or, for the more politically correct, a federal credit union, of course.....

    “Pray for the dead, and fight like hell for the living.”

    -          “Mother” Mary Harris Jones (union and community organizer, born 1837 (Ireland) – 1930 (U.S.))

    “You see, until a few weeks ago, it seemed as if Wall Street had effectively bribed and bullied our political system into forgetting about that whole drawing lavish paychecks while destroying the world economy thing. Then, all of a sudden, some people insisted on bringing the subject up again. And their (Occupy Wall Street) outrage has found resonance with millions of Americans. No wonder Wall Street is whining.”

    -          Paul Krugman, Princeton economist, N.Y. Times column, 10/16/11

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?:
    [QUOTE]I agree with the top 3.  Although I found it kind of odd, that when talking about Feliz as a starter for Texas, Nick described him as being "filthy".  Yet Bard is listed as a question mark.  Bard can be just as "filthy" and Feliz can be just as much of a question mark going from the pen into the rotation. I would be inclined to put the Sox (or maybe Philly) at #4 though then the other at #5. Not really impressed with the Cardinals being that high.  They are solid in the OF, but outside of 1b, their infield is pretty bad.  Other than Carpenter, their rotation is nothing to talk about either.  "IF" Wainwright comes back strong would be a big boost for the starters.   But, I just don't see them being rated this high. Same with Detroit (in reverse order).  Their infield is good, obviously Fielder and Cabrera is a monster combo, but their entire OF is questionable at best.   Outside of Verlander, there isn't a single starter they have that I would want on the Sox. So, they are top heavy with a few big bombs (Fielder, Cabrera, Verlander, Peralta for a SS and Avila for a C) but after that? So, I would put the Sox at #4/5 with Philly.
    Posted by sjddaj[/QUOTE]
    The defending World Series champion St. Louis Cardinals have Chris Carpenter (5.0 WAR* in 2011), Jaime Garcia (3.6), Kyle Lohse (2.5), Jake Westbrook (1.1) and Adam Wainwright (6.1 in 2010).

    The defending AL Central champion Detroit Tigers, who beat the Yankees in the postseason enroute to the ALCS, have Justin Verlander (7.0 in 2011), Doug Fister (5.6), Max Scherzer (2.7) and Rick Porcello (2.7).

    The defending third-place Boston Red Sox have Josh Beckett (4.3), Jon Lester (3.7) and Clay Buchholz (1.1).

    I would not trade the St. Louis or Detroit rotation for the Boston rotation.

    * Wins Above Replacement as reported at FanGraphs
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from sjddaj. Show sjddaj's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    AL34 - if your post was based on what I said about Bard....I couldn't agree more with you.   Bard is a big question mark.  Point I was making though is why is Bard a big question mark, yet Feliz was classified as "filthy"  indicating that he isn't a big question mark.  They are both in the same boat, but Nick wasn't writing it as such.

    hill - Lohse had a way above par year last year.  Look at his career, he consistantly give's up more hits than IP and and ERA in the middle to upper 4's (and that is while pitching in the NL)  this is horrible numbers.  Same can be said for Westbrook who is also horrible (career wise, not based on 1 year).   Wainwright is big "if", but I did said that he would help a lot.  But, when you also considered their respective offenses, the Cards shouldn't be rated higher than the Sox.

    With the Tigers, Scherzer (their #2 starter) you would take his numbers over our #2 (Becket or Lester)?  They are not even close.  Porcello, whose ERA is almost 5.00 the past 2 years with a very high WHIP.   A nobody in Jacob Turner.   Okay, maybe I will take Fister for a #4 or #5 guy.  I would easily take the Sox staff over the Tigers.  Then when you consider the Tigers week pen, and almost nothing in their entire OF, the Sox should be rated higher.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thomasmtom. Show Thomasmtom's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    Here is how the local Las Vegas book sees it. Frankly I was disinterested in the National Leagues odds for the WS.

     
    1. NY  13-2
    2. LA   13-2
    3. DT     9-1
    4. TX     9-1
    5. BRS 10-1
    6. TB    20-1
    7. TOR 30-1
     

    The rest of the AL are up against long odds.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from iamme17. Show iamme17's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    have to agree with hill...the sox starters are at best middlin' and could be worse than middlin' if becket or buckholtz revert to their up n' down past
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?


    I prefer these early projections, from Clay Davenport at Baseball Prospectus:

    http://claydavenport.com/PROJHOME.shtml

    :-)
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from caseycsw. Show caseycsw's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    Davenport is as respected a saberman as they come, so a projection of a Bosox first place finish is tanatalizing...I wonder if his formula included missing Carl Crawford for a month.....It obviously could not factor in the possible acquisition of a fifth starter for the Red Sox, or a decent lefty DH bat for the Yanks....It should be another fascinating year of wire-to-wire baseball....
    “Pray for the dead, and fight like hell for the living.”

    -          “Mother” Mary Harris Jones (union and community organizer, born 1837 (Ireland) – 1930 (U.S.))

    “You see, until a few weeks ago, it seemed as if Wall Street had effectively bribed and bullied our political system into forgetting about that whole drawing lavish paychecks while destroying the world economy thing. Then, all of a sudden, some people insisted on bringing the subject up again. And their (Occupy Wall Street) outrage has found resonance with millions of Americans. No wonder Wall Street is whining.”

    -          Paul Krugman, Princeton economist, N.Y. Times column, 10/16/11





     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree? : The defending World Series champion St. Louis Cardinals have Chris Carpenter (5.0 WAR* in 2011), Jaime Garcia (3.6), Kyle Lohse (2.5), Jake Westbrook (1.1) and Adam Wainwright (6.1 in 2010). The defending AL Central champion Detroit Tigers, who beat the Yankees in the postseason enroute to the ALCS, have Justin Verlander (7.0 in 2011), Doug Fister (5.6), Max Scherzer (2.7) and Rick Porcello (2.7). The defending third-place Boston Red Sox have Josh Beckett (4.3), Jon Lester (3.7) and Clay Buchholz (1.1). I would not trade the St. Louis or Detroit rotation for the Boston rotation. * Wins Above Replacement as reported at FanGraphs
    Posted by hill55[/QUOTE]

    Great stuff, Hill.

    In 1936 the initial induction into the baseball Hall of Fame was:
    • Ty Cobb
    • Walter Johnson
    • Christy Mathewson
    • Babe Ruth
    • Honus Wagner
    In 2012, I'd like to propose this forum's inaugural Hill of Fame:
    • Hill
    • Moon
    • Notin
    • Ram (what happened to him?)
    • one open slot for suggestions






     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    Oops, Zilla's pretty ace too....
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree? : Great stuff, Hill. In 1936 the initial induction into the baseball Hall of Fame was: Ty Cobb Walter Johnson Christy Mathewson Babe Ruth Honus Wagner In 2012, I'd like to propose this forum's inaugural Hill of Fame: Hill Moon Notin Ram (what happened to him?) one open slot for suggestions
    Posted by Chilliwings[/QUOTE]
    Thanks, Chilliwings, but I'm not in the same league as Moon and Notin ... I'm a mere wannabe next to those two.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In response to "Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?": [QUOTE]Sunday Baseball Notes: For what they’re worth, the winter standings Posted by 2004Idiots[/QUOTE] I admit that I don't put a lot of stock in January baseball predictions, but if things break right for any one of about 15 teams, they can win it all, which I think is a good thing, and the Sox are obviously one of them...
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree? : Well. I see where the Sox fans on this board get their "grass is greener" mentality.   I should have looked into sports journalism as a career.  Don't need objectivity, no point in checking facts.  The most important attribute is you need the ability to scare up large amounts of controversy where there is none and large amounts of panic when there is the slightest level of uncertainty...
    Posted by notin[/QUOTE]
    Yup.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from NegativeTrollsAbound. Show NegativeTrollsAbound's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    Didn't the Red Sox win the offseason last year?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kamdog. Show Kamdog's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    I don't see why anyone would predict or even expect that A-Rod is going to have a good year.  Based on what?  How bad he stunk last year?  The guy is breaking down, and, if on the off chance he is a bit better this year, it is only because of how bad he was last year.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?:
    [QUOTE]I don't see why anyone would predict or even expect that A-Rod is going to have a good year.  Based on what?  How bad he stunk last year?  The guy is breaking down, and, if on the off chance he is a bit better this year, it is only because of how bad he was last year.
    Posted by Kamdog[/QUOTE]
    Could the same be written about Kevin Youkilis, who was valued at 3.7 WAR* in 120 games last season (to the 4.2 WAR posted by Alex Rodriguez in 99 games)?

    * Wins Above Replacement as reported at FanGraphs
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?

    In Response to Re: Nick Cafardo's Winter Standings-Do You agree?:
    [QUOTE]I prefer these early projections, from Clay Davenport at Baseball Prospectus: http://claydavenport.com/PROJHOME.shtml :-)
    Posted by RedSoxKimmi[/QUOTE]

    Kimmi - I would say Clay's predictions are just as possible as everyone else's. Someone already mentioned that it all depends on how things break.

    For the Sox, If Clay comes back strong and is healthy for a full season, Youk can play 130 + games at 3B with usual stats and Bard just even pitches to a .500 record, the Sox should be just fine. Same can be said about NY and every other team. How will injuries, depth, and will to won; only 162 games will tell.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share